I have used a custom implementation that just had the following commands:

- Enable (enable the buffer)
- Flush (flush the buffer)
- Disable (disable the buffer, which also flushes it)

It worked great, but I wasn't using any time sensitive XEPs like Jingle
that you would want to let through.

The major issue on iOS is if the device "wakes up" more than 15 times in 5
mins your app would get killed, so letting through "important" messages
still wouldn't be a good idea.

Regards

Spencer


On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Peter Waher <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> > How do we define "important"? There's the challenge. :-)
>>
>> True. But not only "how", but also "where" it is defined. The received
>> can define what it wants, the xmpp server can define what to forward under
>> certain conditions, and the sender can define the priority of a message.
>>
>> Many network protocols have solved this by letting the sender determine a
>> priority or QoS level for each message. The sender normally knows if
>> something is "important" (for instance an alarm, or a call or control
>> command) or "normal" (informational message) or "less important" (recurrent
>> status update), for instance, and so no complex logic for this is required.
>>
>> An objection could be made that an application could then choose to send
>> all messages as "important" messages, overriding any throttling logic. But
>> in practice, this would be counterproductive since users would quickly find
>> out what service/device/address works badly and stop using it or
>> unfriending misbehaving contacts.
>>
>> The above solution could then hypothetically be complemented by a simple
>> subscription mechanism on the client, or an automatic rule on the xmpp
>> server determining what messages to forward and when, and perhaps also with
>> bandwidth limits on different types of messages, and if messages not being
>> forwarded should be treated as offline messages or thrown away (based on
>> message priority).
>>
>
> I think this is XEP-0334, Messaging Processing Hints. Or ought to be, at
> any rate.
>

Reply via email to